HomeMy WebLinkAboutOB 1 INDUS. COMPLEX 01-18-82OLD BUSINESS NO. 1
DATE:
January 18, 1982
Inter-Corn
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Chairman & Planning Agency Members
Community Development Department
2871Walnut/Irvine Industrial Complex
Recommended Action
Staff recommends the proposed building and parking lot addition be allowed
for the project at 2871 Walnut. The proposal currently conforms to Code
and the Irvine Company has affirmed that a maximum of 50% (gross square
footage) per building will be strictly enforced. It is realized the trend
toward more intensive use of office space in industrial areas is on the
increase, yet staff is satisfied with the Irvine Company's commitment to
keep office use at present levels.
Staff additionally recommends that:
staff be directed to work with the applicant to ensure
that an adequate and acceptable landscape plan be de-
signed for the parking area;
e
staff be directed to work with the Irvine Co. draft
an amendment to the Planned Community District
Regulations to include that a. conditional use permit
be required for all projects that have in excess of
50% office space or other regulatory measures needed.
Background
On December 21, 1981, the Planning Agency agenda continued an item
concerning the addition of a second floor within the existing building
located at 2871 Walnut. This addition would be large enough to create a
potential 94% increase in office space. A concomitant expansion of the
existing parking lot utilizing an adjacent vacant parcel was also proposed.
The subject item was continued for additional review to this date.
Discussion on Irvine Industrial Complex
Original approval for the Irvine Industrial Complex was based in part on
the data presented in EIR 73-1. The generation of traffic in the area was
of particular concern, and the traffic counts in the EIR were calculated
according to the proposed land use within the complex. The project was in
fact developed as proposed and consists of 10 acres designated neighborhood
commercial and 305 acres for industrial/support commercial.
Chairman & Planning Agency
2871Walnut/Irvine Industrial Complex
Page 2
The Irvine Company has re-affirmed that the C.C.&R,'s for the complex
restrict support office to a maximum of 50%. (An exception would be for a
qualified corporate headquarters facility.)
Points of discussion at the December 21, 1981 Planning Agency meeting
centered around traffic and the concept of Research and Development (R&D).
While traffic in the area is at a level that has brought complaints from
nearby residents, neither design capacity nor estimated traffic flow (EIR
73-1) have been met.
A more difficult area to analyze is the concept of R&D. Traditionally, R&D
has consisted of the study and/or production of a product that will either
develop innovative methods for production of subsequent product; or may
simplify, modify, improve or otherwise change the finished product.
Presently, with the use of computers, models or systems can be "manu-
factured'' and "tested" on a terminal, thus enabling floor space to be
utilized more intensely. Staff would not consider the production of paper
(i.e., files for accountants, attorneys or insurance companies) as an R&D
use. Further, it has been the opinion of staff that in an industrial area,
the industrial use (i.e., manufacturing and/or assembly) must support any
office use and not the other way around.
Discussion on the Subject Project
As submitted, the applicant is proposing a second floor to an existing
building and is planning on providing additional parking that would
accommodate any use permitted in the complex. The plan shows no interior
improvements except an additional floor. Staff feels that the construction
could proceed as proposed, in that the modification should be viewed as
speculative square footage. Staff's concern is not with the additional
floor per se, since a legitimate industrial use could be conducted within
the building. Nor would staff be concerned with the additional parking
since an industrial use may require such parking. For example, Ocean
Pacific, located at 14312 Chambers is only 21% office and 79% warehouse/
manufacturing, yet has a parking problem.
Staff would be concerned however with the possibility of a future tenant
attempting to improve the new addition to accommodate offices. At such a
time, staff would not issue building permits that would allow more than 50%
office. (An exception would be for a qualified corporate headquarters.)
JSD:jh